Literature DB >> 8893716

Clinical outcomes and radiological instability following decompressive lumbar laminectomy for degenerative spinal stenosis: a comparison of patients undergoing concomitant arthrodesis versus decompression alone.

M W Fox1, B M Onofrio, B M Onofrio, A D Hanssen.   

Abstract

One hundred twenty-four patients with degenerative lumbar stenosis underwent decompression with fusion (32 patients) and without fusion (92 patients) during a 30-month period between 1986 and 1988. Patient-reported satisfaction at a mean follow-up period of 5.8 years (range 4.6-6.8 years) revealed a 79% good or fair outcome and a 21% poor outcome (26 patients). Seven patients (6%) developed lumbar instability, three patients (2%) developed new stenosis at an adjacent unoperated level, and three patients (2%) developed a new disc herniation between 2 and 5 years after surgery. Progressive postoperative spondylolisthesis occurred in 31% of patients with normal preoperative alignment (mean 7.8 mm, range 2-20 mm) and in 73% of patients with preoperative subluxation (mean 5.1 mm, range 2-13 mm) in whom fusion was not attained. Radiological progression did not correlate well with patient-reported outcome. The major conclusions from this study are the following: 1) the majority of patients respond well to this surgery, but complication (22%) and late deterioration (10%) rates are not insignificant; 2) radiological instability is common after decompression for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, but this correlates poorly with clinical outcome; 3) there are no definitive clinical or radiological factors that preoperatively predict patients at risk for a poor outcome; 4) post-operative radiological instability is more likely to occur when the following criteria are present: preoperative spondy-degenerated L-4 or a markedly degenerated L-3 disc; and when a radical and extensive decompression greater than one level is planned; and 5) the group at greatest risk for a poor outcome consists of those patients with normal preoperative alignment who do not suffer slippage following surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8893716     DOI: 10.3171/jns.1996.85.5.0793

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  40 in total

Review 1.  Effect of fusion following decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Lin Liang; Wei-Min Jiang; Xue-Feng Li; Heng Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-09-15

2.  Spinal stenosis re-operation rate in Sweden is 11% at 10 years--a national analysis of 9,664 operations.

Authors:  Karl-Ake Jansson; Gunnar Németh; F Granath; P Blomqvist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-03-08       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study.

Authors:  Halit Cavuşoğlu; Ramazan Alper Kaya; Osman Nuri Türkmenoglu; Cengiz Tuncer; Ibrahim Colak; Yunus Aydin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-08-22       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Decompression with or without concomitant fusion in lumbar stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review.

Authors:  M L Dijkerman; G M Overdevest; W A Moojen; C L A Vleggeert-Lankamp
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Patient-based outcomes for the operative treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Samo K Fokter; Scott A Yerby
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-21       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Risk Factors for Reoperation in Patients Treated Surgically for Lumbar Stenosis: A Subanalysis of the 8-year Data From the SPORT Trial.

Authors:  Michael C Gerling; Dante Leven; Peter G Passias; Virginie Lafage; Kristina Bianco; Alexandra Lee; Jon D Lurie; Tor D Tosteson; Wenyan Zhao; Kevin F Spratt; Kristen Radcliff; Thomas J Errico
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Decompressive surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: long-term results.

Authors:  Ioannis D Gelalis; Kosmas S Stafilas; Anastasios V Korompilias; Konstantinos C Zacharis; Alexandros E Beris; Theodoros A Xenakis
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2005-11-25       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Contralateral facet-sparing sublaminar endoscopic foraminotomy for the treatment of lumbar lateral recess stenosis: technical note.

Authors:  Guntram Krzok; Albert E Telfeian; Ralf Wagner; Christoph P Hofstetter; Menno Iprenburg
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-06

9.  [Decompression of lumbar lateral spinal stenosis: full-endoscopic, interlaminar technique].

Authors:  S Ruetten; M Komp; P Hahn; S Oezdemir
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.154

10.  The Felix-trial. Double-blind randomization of interspinous implant or bony decompression for treatment of spinal stenosis related intermittent neurogenic claudication.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Mark P Arts; Ronald Brand; Bart W Koes; Wilco C Peul
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.